Daglord wrote:In addition, Ted Walter and Richard Gage announce Professor Leroy Hulsey's upcoming progress report presentation on his World Trade Center 7 Study, which will be livestreamed from the University of Alaska Fairbanks' website on September 6th.

Last Wednesday, Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey of the University of Alaska Fairbanks presented the findings and conclusion of his team’s two-year engineering study evaluating whether fire caused the collapse of World Trade Center 7 on September 11, 2001.

Many “9/11 Truth” researchers focus on the mysterious collapse of World Trade Center 7 (WTC7) as the smoking gun evidence that Americans were lied to about the attacks. WTC7 was not hit by a plane, yet it collapsed at 5:20 p.m. on Sept. 11, 2001. According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the collapse was caused by office fires leading to thermal expansion of the building’s supportive columns and girders.

Dr. Hulsey’s presentation, “A Structural Reevaluation of the Collapse of World Trade Center 7, September 2017 Progress Report”, detailed how his team eliminated fire as the cause of the collapse of the 47-storey building. Hulsey explained that NIST’s report on the collapse found fires on floors 7 through 9, 11 through 14, 19, 22, 29, and 30. However, there is no evidence of fire below floor 7, Hulsey said.

On September 6, 2017, from the University of Alaska Fairbanks' Schaibel Auditorium, Dr. Leroy Hulsey presented the findings and conclusions detailed in his team’s September 2017 progress report.

The draft report of the study will be published later in the fall. A six-week public comment period will follow the release of the draft report, allowing for input from the public and the engineering community. The final report, which will incorporate constructive comments and will be vetted by peer reviewers, will then be published in early 2018.

“You have to ask yourself lots of questions … Where is the combustibility in this building? … Did WTC7 collapse because of fires?” Hulsey asked during his presentation. “Our study shows that it did not collapse because of fires.” This revelation matches what Hulsey told MintPress News in September 2016, when his team’s preliminary finding was “that fire did not produce the failure at this particular building,” adding “additional calculations are further substantiating the finding.”

Dr. Hulsey and his team developed an AutoCAD drawing that they then used to create a virtual geography of the building. The research team first partnered with the non-profit Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth in May of 2015 to study of the collapse of WTC7. They did not release their final report in April 2017 as originally planned, but Hulsey said a draft report of the study will be released in October or November 2017 and will be open for public comment for a six-week period. “I am still examining the progressive collapse. We thought we would be complete by the time announced but it is taking longer than I expected,” Hulsey told MintPress. “I simply am not going to release it until I am sure we are totally correct.”

A final report will be published in early 2018 and submitted to peer-reviewed journals. “It is my plan to provide the opportunity for public and technical input, a form of review and peer review,” Dr. Hulsey stated. “I will have it reviewed during this time frame. Once we have gone through that preliminary review; I will submit the findings to peer-reviewed journals for publication.”

The Bobby McIlvaine Act

Today, on the 16th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, the organization funding Hulsey’s study, held a press conference discussing the conclusions of the study and the introduction of the “Bobby McIlvaine World Trade Center Investigation Act.” The Bobby McIlvaine Act is draft legislation that would impanel a select committee in either chamber of Congress to reinvestigate the destruction of the three World Trade Center towers on September 11, 2001. The act is named after Bobby McIlvaine, who was tragically killed at the age of 26 while entering the North Tower of the World Trade Center.

Richard Gage, the founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, spoke today about the Bobby McIlvaine Act at the National Press Club in Washington. “The Bobby McIlvaine Act will, for the first time, put in Congress’ hands the resolution which will cause an investigation of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers’ destruction,” Gage told Mint Press. “We are putting Congress on notice and hopefully this act will be successfully legislated into law.”

Following the press conference, Mr. Gage and Bob McIlvaine, Bobby McIlvaine’s father, began the process of distributing informational packets related to the Bobby McIlvaine Act to every member of Congress. The next stage in their campaign will involve attempting to organize a bipartisan group of sponsors to introduce the resolution by September 11, 2018. Mr. McIlvaine has been independently investigating the 9/11 attacks since his son’s death and calling attention to what he says are discrepancies in the government’s narrative of the events of that day. McIlvaine has been an outspoken leader in the so-called “9/11 Truth” movement, advocating for a new investigation since the release of the 9/11 Commission Report in 2004.\

The 9/11 Truth movement includes victims, their families, and experts in a range of fields who are skeptical of the government’s official line on 9/11. Some of the groups include Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Firefighters for 9/11 Truth & Unity, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, 9/11 Families United for Justice Against Terrorism, Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice, and other local activist groups and individuals from around the globe. It’s a loose-knit movement without an official position, and the opinions, theories and ideas held among its members sometimes conflict with one another. However, those working within the broader movement are bound by the belief that the official narrative promoted by the U.S. government is full of holes.

9/11 Truth in the Donald Trump era

The election of Donald Trump brought fear and paranoia to some of the American population, and hope and elation to another segment of the nation. Elements of the 9/11 Truth movement believed Trump might support their cause for a new investigation. Although Trump never officially discussed his interest in a new investigation into the events of September 11, 2001, he did make vague references to the “secret papers” and to the Saudi government’s possible role in funding the 9/11 attacks. During a campaign event Trump called out former president George W. Bush for the Iraq war and referenced “very secret” papers involving the Saudi government and 9/11, elaborating:

It wasn’t the Iraqis that knocked down the World Trade Center; we went after Iraq, we decimated the country. Iran’s taking over, okay. But it wasn’t the Iraqis, you will find out who really knocked down the World Trade Center, ‘cause they have papers in there that are very secret, you may find it’s the Saudis, okay? But you will find out.”

The “secret papers” Trump referred to are the now-declassified 28-pages of the “Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001.” Although the final report amounts to over 800 pages, the 28 pages were classified by former President George W. Bush shortly after the report was released in 2002. The papers detail the story of Saudi nationals suspected of being Saudi intelligence agents involved in the terror attacks. In July 2016, after nearly 15 years of secrecy and resistance from the Bush and Obama administrations, the report was released to the public and the family members of the victims of the 9/11 terror attacks.

While campaigning for the presidency, Trump also gave an interview on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends,” stating that the release of the pages would be “very profound” and relate to Saudi Arabia’s role in the 9/11 attacks.

That’s very serious stuff,” Trump said. “It’s sort of nice to know who your friends are and perhaps who your enemies are. You’re going to see some very revealing things released in those papers.”

Trump also flirted with the 9/11 Truth movement when he criticized former President Obama for his veto of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, or JASTA, which unanimously passed the House and the Senate in 2016 after a hard-fought battle by the families of the victims of 9/11. The law, passed over Obama’s veto, has now opened the door for lawsuits from the victims of 9/11 and their families against Saudi Arabia to inspect the Kingdom’s possible role in 9/11. Trump called Obama’s veto “shameful” and “one of the low points of his presidency.”

It is these comments that caused some “9/11 truthers” — including some family members of 9/11 victims — to believe a Donald Trump presidency might lead to a new investigation into the terror attacks. The 9/11 Families and Survivors United for Justice Against Terrorism — the organization largely responsible for pushing JASTA — sent a letter to President Trump asking him to clarify his position on Saudi Arabia and its role in the terror attacks of September 11, 2001. “This letter is inspired by news reports that today you met with Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman al Saud,” reads the letter from Terry Strada, a widow and the national chair for the 9/11 Families & Survivors. Strada’s letter continues:

As you know, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a defendant in our lawsuit because of the involvement of its agents in supporting the 9/11 hijackers, and for support that flowed to al-Qaeda through institutions the Kingdom established and funded to spread a radical form of Islam that lies at the root of both al-Qaeda and, more recently, ISIS. Despite mounting evidence, the Saudis have refused to accept accountability for their actions and the injury they have caused across the globe.”

Since becoming president, Donald Trump has shown little interest in carrying his “you may find it’s the Saudis” campaign rhetoric any further. Instead, he has signed an arms deals worth more than $100 billion with the Saudi Kingdom and has continued to offer support for their bombing campaign in Yemen. Trump has not taken any steps towards calling for an investigation into the 9/11 attacks or Saudi Arabia’s possible role. He has remained silent on the controversial topic. The upcoming release of Dr. Hulsey’s study on the collapse of World Trade Center 7 may force Trump to publicly address the situation.

Terry Strada, whose husband Tom Strada died in the twin towers, is skeptical of the importance of Dr. Hulsey’s study. “It doesn’t matter to me what happened to Building 7. I know what happened to the Twin Towers and I know how my husband was murdered. I know who worked with al-Qaeda. That’s all I care about,” Mrs. Strada explained to MintPress News via phone. “It’s a very separate incident. I don’t see how anything that happened to Building 7 has to do with the Twin Towers.”

Despite her skepticism towards the study, Strada is still calling on President Trump to address the concerns of the 9/11 families:

We would like to see some action. We would like to sit down and meet with him, have him hear our side. We know he hears it from the Saudi’s all the time. We want our chance.”

Saudi Arabia reportedly spent more than a quarter of a million dollars at President Trump’s Washington hotel as part of their lobbying efforts against a controversial terrorism-related law.

The kingdom hired lobbyists and consultants to push back against the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), which would allow U.S. citizens to sue other governments for terrorist attacks, The Wall Street Journal reported Monday.

Those hired individuals then spent about $190,000 on lodging, $78,000 on catering as well as $1,600 on parking at the Trump-owned luxury hotel, The Daily Caller first reported. MSLGroup, a public relations firm, disclosed the kingdom’s payments last week while filing the foreign lobbying paperwork with the Justice Department.

Michael Petruzzello, an MSLGroup executive, told the Journal that a subcontractor in the company first made the payments to the Trump International Hotel, which the Saudi government then reimbursed. Petruzello acknowledged that the efforts were part of a lobbying campaign in which military veterans would be brought to Capitol Hill to speak out against the legislation.

Victims’ families and survivors from the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks had been pushing for legislation like JASTA which would allow them to sue any foreign government allegedly involved. The Saudi government has repeatedly denied any involvement in the terror plot, and U.S. officials have supported their stance. Trump visited Saudi Arabia on his first international trip last month, where he spoke about their mutual efforts to fight against terrorism.

Lobbying payments from foreign governments to the president's companies have raised ethics questions on whether the president is completely separated from his businesses. Trump said the Trump Organization would donate any profits from foreign governments to the U.S. Treasury earlier this year, but the company has so far declined to give details about how it is handling such profits, the Journal reported.

The White House referred the Journal’s payment questions to the Trump Organization. A spokeswoman for the company didn’t respond to the newspaper’s question about how it would handle the Saudi Arabian payments.

To be clear: Trump’s U-turn on Saudi Arabia has little to do with being moderated by the realities of high office or swayed by the Beltway’s foreign policy elites. Despite his bombastic campaign rhetoric, he never planned to go after the Saudis in office — even after publicly accusing them of murdering 3,000 Americans. Early on in the campaign, in 2015, a senior Arab diplomat told me, on condition of anonymity, that Trump had informed most of the Gulf governments, in private, that his anti-Muslim and anti-Arab rhetoric was “all for the campaign” and that it would be business as usual once he was elected (or, for that matter, defeated):https://theintercept.com/2017/05/18/donald-trump-said-saudi-arabia-was-behind-911-now-hes-going-there-on-his-first-foreign-trip/

Sixteen years ago today, the United States was attacked. On the day of the attack, 2,996 Americans lost their lives. The 9/11 attacks will never be forgotten, but they must also never be propagandized by the government. Ron Paul alluded to how that might happen in his official statement released on September 12, 2001:

Yesterday, Americans were awakened to find ourselves in a war, attacked by barbarians who targeted innocent civilians. This despicable act reveals how deep-seated is the hatred that has driven this war.

Though many Americans have just become aware of how deeply we are involved in this war, it has been going on for decades. We are obviously seen by the terrorists as an enemy.

In war there is no more reprehensible act than for combatants to slaughter innocent civilian bystanders. This is what happened yesterday.

If there is such a thing, a moral war is one that is only pursued in self-defense. Those who initiate aggression against others for the purpose of occupation or merely to invoke death and destruction are unforgivable and serve only to spread wanton killing.

In our grief, we must remember our responsibilities. The Congress’ foremost obligation in a constitutional republic is to preserve freedom and provide for national security. Yesterday our efforts to protect our homeland came up short. Our policies that led to that shortcoming must be reevaluated and changed if found to be deficient.

When we retaliate for this horror we have suffered, we must be certain that only the guilty be punished. More killing of innocent civilians will only serve to flame the fires of war and further jeopardize our security. Congress should consider its constitutional authority to grant letters of marque and reprisal to meet our responsibility.

Demanding domestic security in times of war invites carelessness in preserving civil liberties and the right of privacy. Frequently the people are only too anxious for their freedoms to be sacrificed on the altar of authoritarianism thought to be necessary to remain safe and secure. Nothing would please the terrorists more than if we willingly give up some of our cherished liberties while defending ourselves from their threat.

It is our job to wisely choose our policies and work hard to understand the root causes of the war in which we find ourselves.

We must all pray for peace and ask for God’s guidance for our President, our congressional leaders, and all America- and for the wisdom and determination required to resolve this devastating crisis.

Less than 24 hours had passed and Ron Paul already saw the opportunity for government power to grow in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. His statement outlines the limits for retaliation that avoid further civilian casualties and wanton destruction. Letters of marque are Congressional authorizations that allow private contractors to fulfill military duties.

If they had been granted, such letters would have allowed a private contractor to pursue a bounty on Osama Bin Laden’s head instead of having the United States military invade Afghanistan. After 16 years of occupation, such an option grows more appealing in hindsight.

Paul also condemned the increases in government surveillance that he foresaw would violate the rights of American citizens. While no one could have foreseen what would follow 9/11, he identified, in a clear-eyed fashion, the likely consequences of a push to fight terrorism by abridging civil liberties.

(2012) We've covered the who/what/where/when/why of 9/11 on this podcast in the past, but in this 9/11 11th anniversary episode of the podcast we ask: what is the meaning of 9/11 truth? What do we know? What don't we know? And why should we care? Join James as he explores this question through interviews with Clyde Lewis, Tom Secker and Jack Blood.

In November 2007, Stepnoski expressed support for the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Stepnoski is also a marijuana legalization advocate and is an active member of NORML. His position on this subject made his high school alma mater, Cathedral Preparatory School, rescind his nomination to the school's athletic hall of fame. For that same reason, he immigrated to Canada.

He knows it won't be easy--coming out of the "smoky closet," as one marijuana advocate puts it. After all, he has been a professional football player for 13 years, a five-time Pro-Bowler, a two-time Super Bowl champ, a Dallas Cowboy. He can almost hear the voices of those who would accuse him of all manner of betrayal. Wasn't he supposed to be a role model? Someone who needed to send the right message to kids--a message in lockstep with the hard-line anti-drug stance of the NFL? But to sign on as the new president of Texas NORML, an organization dedicated to reforming marijuana laws, to join its national advisory board, well that just seemed a reckless way to kick off his retirement.

Future NFL Hall of Famer, Mark Stepnoski, recently received some internet buzz for a ubiquitous article in the Erie Times News and his interview add-on supporting the 9-11 truth movement. On November 6, 2007 Jack Blood interviewed Mark Stepnoski about his beliefs on what happened that day, September 11, 2001, on his syndicated daily radio show, Deadline Live, on November 6, 2007.

Mark Stepnoski's pro career in the NFL was spent with the Dallas Cowboys (1989-1994, 1999-2000), and the Houston Oilers (1995-1998). Stepnoski won two Super Bowls while with the Cowboys and was a five time Pro Bowler, attending the game from 1992 through 1996. Also notable among his achievements are the contributions he made to help Emmitt Smith become the all time rushing champion of the NFL.

This was the first time Stepnoski acknowledged his beliefs that the government has lied to us, the people, about what happened on 9-11 on talk radio.

Stepnoski, who is extremely well read and advocates literacy in America, went on to give a long list of book reviews from the most well know researchers in the 9-11 truth movement. Webster Tarpley, Peter Dale Scott, Nafeez Ahmed, and Mike Ruppert were mentioned among others. He praised 911 blogger.com as a central portal for information about 9-11 and a historical perspective of false flag terrorism, and discussed meeting William Rodriguez - a man decorated by President Bush as a hero on 911, and who has for many years toured the world as a 911 Truth Icon.

Stepnoski also elaborated on his support for Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul, discussed the conspiracy centered around the Oklahoma City bombings, and the propaganda surrounding the death of Pat Tillman, a patriotic NFL superstar who was shot and killed in Afghanistan by his own men and used for propaganda and as a recruitment poster by the Bush administration.

"At The time I seriously thought to myself, Is this an act of a foreign government? Or is this a False Flag attack by the Military" said Stepnoski who added into the conversation several points that indicate an inside job. Building 7 and the fact that no steel building had ever fallen from fire, yet on 911 three had accomplished this feat. The insider trading, or "put options" that took place before 911 also concerned Mr. Stepnoski.

Of course, Bill O'Leilly, Sean Vanity and the people at NFLcentric, bread and circus centric, Orwellotron Faux news network will say that Mark Stepnoski is an offensive lineman and therefore has no right to read, speak or think. That he's just a dumb animal who was owned by one of the many billionaires in sports franchise today. That he took too many shots to the head. That he once knew a guy who took steroids that he owned a pit bull or that he knew someone who owned a pit bull. That he smoked too much weed, and that he is a citizen of crazy town. But Stepnoski can cut block any ad homonym attack by relying on the resources of the facts which are widely known by at least fifty percent of America as the polls prove. Mark Stepnoski should be a hero amongst all sports fans and truth fans everywhere and besides, he's too big to argue with.

When someone dies of decidedly unnatural causes, two words come immediately to mind: “closure” and “accountability.” The idea is that by holding the perpetrators of a crime accountable, we can both provide a measure of closure for the family and friends of the deceased as well as limit the possibility of such a fate befalling our own loved ones too.

It is difficult to imagine a death more “unnatural” than that of NFL player turned Army Ranger Pat Tillman, shot down in Afghanistan by his fellow troops in an incident classified as “friendly fire” ten years ago. Yet, despite the high-profile nature of his demise, those two words, “closure” and “accountability,” have been in incredibly short supply for the Tillman family. This is not just a tragedy for the Tillmans; it is a tragedy for anyone who thinks that government should not exist above the law.

The questions surrounding both the death of Pat Tillman, as well the response by the United States government to the news, has simply never been answered. This is not about conjuring conspiracy theories or raising the bizarre timing of Tillman’s being shot during a time when he was outspoken to fellow soldiers about his belief that the war in Iraq was “illegal.” This is not about Gen. Wesley Clark’s saying he believed it was “very possible” that Tillman was murdered. This is about extremely basic questions that the George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Gen. John Abizaid and Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal have simply not been compelled to answer. Let’s go through them:

1) Why did the US Congressional Oversight Committee, after coming to the conclusion in April 2007 that the circumstances surrounding Tillman’s death demanded investigation, stop investigating? Why did it accept, in its own words, that “the investigation was frustrated by a near universal lack of recall”? Why, instead of pursuing the matter, did it move on to investigating steroids in baseball?

2) Why were Tillman’s uniform, his military notebook and his effects burned on the scene immediately after his shooting? In the words of a source of mine close to the events that day, “Every military protocol was ignored regarding the handling of Pat’s body and his equipment.”

3) Why did the coroner refuse for months to sign off on Pat’s autopsy?

4) Why were soldiers on the scene ordered not to tell the truth about the circumstances of the shooting?

5) Why has General John Abizaid never had to answer for the devastating San Francisco Chronicle investigation that shows he repeatedly misrepresented what he knew—and where he was—after Tillman’s death? He said he was in Iraq, which makes sense given that April 2004 was the bloodiest, most chaotic month of the war. Yet records show he was in Afghanistan talking to Tillman’s platoon leader. Why? And why lie about it?

6) Why does Lt. Gen McChrystal get to skate by with saying that there were “mistakes, missteps and errors” that occurred after Tillman was killed? Pat’s father described McChrystal’s actions as a “falsified homicide investigation.” If McChrystal did falsify the investigation, he belongs behind bars.

7) How do we understand the actions of Senator John McCain? By all accounts, McCain was furious that, because of the Bush administration, he eulogized Pat Tillman at his nationally televised funeral as if he had died at the hands of the Taliban. He pledged to the Tillmans that he would get to the truth. For a while, McCain was their ally. Then he ran for president in 2008 and stopped helping them. As Mary Tillman said to me, “The investigation that he helped us get actually caused us to have more questions and at that point he started backing off. I think he thought that we were becoming sort of a political encumbrance to him, or could be.” John McCain should have to explain why he stopped helping the Tillman family.

These are only some of the questions. Peter King of Sports Illustrated, perhaps the most-read football writer in the United States, wrote on Monday, “The circumstances around the death [of Tillman], which took place in a firefight with enemy forces near the Pakistan border in eastern Afghanistan, remain a mystery.”

They shouldn’t have to “remain a mystery.” The family is entitled to answers, and we collectively are entitled to the truth. The family has the right to closure, and we have the right to see those who broke the law held accountable. Our need to demand the truth is rooted less in solidarity with the Tillman family, and more in our desire to not have a government that believes covering up a killing is a part of its constitutional duties. We all suffer as long as the truth of Pat Tillman’s death remains hidden. This should be a criminal investigation. It is past time to pull George W. Bush away from his paintbrushes, to tell Stanley McChrystal to stop hawking his book, and to get their hands on some Bibles to swear to tell, at long last, the damnable truth.

The family of professional football player turned soldier Pat Tillman sets out to explore and uncover the real story behind their son's death in April 2004 when he was serving in Afghanistan. Tillman, killed not by the Taliban as had first been reported, but instead by friendly fire, left a million-dollar career to serve the United States. But, while searching for the truth, his family uncovers more than the real story -- they expose a shocking propagandistic military cover-up.

the most important vote (that I can remember) in my lifetime was forced this week. I lurk 3-4 forums & didn't see a word on this, not even those with political threads littering the front page. I 'like' a shit-ton FB pages from all over the spectrum that barely, if at all, mentioned it. little to no talk in liberal & conservative FB groups, they're still treating this as a political hockey game. Media ignored it, except libertarian. no tweet from Trump. very few gave a shit - instead arguing about Melania's shoes, young boy mowing WH lawn, TrumpCare, Russians, "Rocket Man" & the fear-mongering/war-mongering duopoly praising Trump's UN speech.

a vote was forced to repeal the 2001 AUMF that they STILL use to justify military action 17 years later, pausing the war & forcing a new authorization (likely) or for the wars to finally end (no chance). either way, a 6 month debate on whether or not the American people support these endless wars (with no end in sight & no clear objective) & if our recent military action has ANYTHING to do with responding to 9/11. obviously, a debate the "establishment" would rather not have.

this is why 9/11 truth still matters IMO. this AUMF has been a blank check for the President/Administration (& now Pentagon) to wage war across the globe - without accountability, reasoning or debate for the last 17 fucking years & has gone unchallenged. not that I thought it would pass, but that's not the point. it's why they continue to invoke 9/11 every chance they get, to continue the fraudulent war on terror abroad & increase the police state at home. Ron Paul tries to put a positive spin on it below (not sure I agree, I imagine if there was a sitting Dem president the votes would be the same just reversed re: party - respect to the handful who couldn't care less which party holds office).

These senators view the president as ill-informed and reckless, if not mentally unbalanced. That they are nevertheless OK with granting him a blank check to use the world's most powerful military as he pleases suggests how desperate members of Congress are to dodge their duties.

Roggasch really doesn't like Trump (spot on IMO), regardless, it's hard to disagree that 9/11 is still the most important issue today.

So just in case you forgot RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY THEORISTS....911 was an inside job..The war on Terror is fake. But dont tell the alt right that...Trumps ban on refugees and particularly Muslims. This is very dangerous because its FANTASY..But its just another day in Surrealist Post modern America.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has forced a debate and vote on his amendment to repeal the authorization for the 2001 war on Afghanistan and 2002 authorization for war on Iraq. His colleagues in the Senate are pulling out all stops to avoid even a debate on the issue. Why?

I still see 'official' 9/11 rhetoric everywhere and it makes me ill. While down in Brasil they were promoting a National Geographic Documentary special on 9/11, fully parroting the same story concocted from day 1.

When I got back, heard a radio program discussing security in '...a post-9/11 world' (rhetoric taking the assumption that it was fully foreign terrorism and nothing else)

This still weighs on me greatly, the War on Terror continues to this day, Mainstream media continues, all founded on a bunch of provable lies that nobody wants to look at. What kind of crazy fake reality is the world operating under? Its madness

Wow, I just listened to this fantastic podcast, they go into some really juicy 9/11 stuff:

The most interesting part for me was something I had never heard before: WTC BUILDING 6

Apparently there was also a Building 6 that was also completely destroyed. But not just completely destroyed... it had a huge gaping 8-storey HOLE going through it, right through into the sub-basement levels of the structure. The building looks as though it had been destroyed from the INSIDE OUT:

List of tenants in Six World Trade Center:

United States Customs Service United States Department of Commerce Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms United States Department of Agriculture – Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (AAPHIS) United States Department of Labor The Peace Corps (New York Regional Office) Export-Import Bank of the United States Eastco Building Services (building management)

Apparently there was a United States Customs Service VAULT in the basement level of Building 6, and when authorities got there on 9/11 it was wide open and empty.

Zakheim served as a foreign policy advisor to George W. Bush...He was part of the Project for the New American Century.

From 1987-2001, Zakheim was CEO of SPC International, a subsidiary of System Planning Corporation, a high-technology analytical firm. In September 2000 Zakheim is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations

He was then appointed as Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) from 2001 in George W. Bush administration, and served in this capacity until April 2004. During his term as Comptroller, he was tasked to help track down the Pentagon's 2.3 trillion dollars worth of unaccounted transactions

Under Zakheim, trillions of dollars worth of transactions went unaccounted for. But even before this, with his help, Squads of US F-16 and F-15 were classified military surplus and sold to Israel at a fraction of their value. Israel, a country of 4.8 million Russian and Polish Jewish émigrés, flies on one of the biggest Air Forces in the world, thanks to Mr. Zakheim.

The missing trillions was brushed aside by the events of 9/11, what would have been a scandal was widely forgotten as the 9/11 attacks occured the next day ad the world was gripped in shock and terror.

So we so far have an ardent Zionist who has pushed to have Israel have the largest collection of F-16's outside of America, and also despite it being his responsibility and job, cannot account for trillions of dollars being spent in military spending?

"I believe this to be a very important article. As you may probably know, I've steadfastly maintained that Dov Zakheim, the former Comptroller of the Pentagon, is a key conspirator in the 9/11 fraud. The following article sheds more light on this powerful shadowy character; the missing $2.3 Trillion; his connection to the mysterious Boeing 767 tanker deal (I believe the aircraft that impacted the Twin Towers were KC-767s, the military tanker version of the Boeing 767); and his involvement in SPC, the company that manufactures remote control 'termination' systems for aircraft. Yes, things are beginning to snap into focus very quickly..." -- a physicist in the 911 Truth movement

Dov Zakheim, former Bush appointee as Pentagon Comptroller from May 4, 2001 to March 10, 2004. At that time he was unable to explain the disappearance of $1 trillion dollars. Actually, nearly three years earlier, Donald Rumsfeld announced on September 10, 2001 that an audit discovered $2.3 trillion was also missing from the Pentagon books [1]. That story, as I mentioned, was buried under 9-11's rubble. The two sums disappeared on Zakheim's watch.

More from the resume: Wikipedia points out that Zakheim is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and in 2000 a co- author of the Project for the New American Century's position paper, Rebuilding America's Defenses, advocating the necessity for a Pearl-Harbor-like incident to mobilize the country into war with its enemies, mostly Middle Eastern Muslim nations.

As to Zakheim's hell-raiser lineage, Judicial Inc points out that Grandpa Zakheim was born in 1870, Julius Zakheim (Zhabinka), in the Ukraine, a Russian rabbi who married a relative of Karl Marx. He was a Menshevik/Bolshevik and played a leading role in the 1905 turmoil that paved the way for the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. The Bolshevik master plan called for the state of Israel, which was chosen for its proximity to the world's oil and an area of religious significance.

Dov's Father, Rabbi Jacob I. Zakheim was born in 1910 and reared in Poland's swarm of Zionist hard guys, read assassins and bombers. His Polish town, near Bilaystok, also brought us Yitzhak Shir, and family friends included Menachem Begin and Moshe Arens. Dov's father was an active member of Betar, formed in 1923 in Riga, Latvia. Its goal was to control the Middle East (and its oil). It was known that the Jewish people needed their own country and they chose Palestine and claimed it a Jewish state "on both sides of the Jordan."

Instructions to jurors in a court of law require the prosecutor to satisfy three elements: motive, means, and opportunity. Means would include access to remote hijack technology, a subset of remote flying. It is of interest that Dov Zakheim, directly responsible as comptroller for the disappearance of $2.3 trillion from the Pentagon, not only had access to remote hijack technology, but invented it. Zakheim's company, SPC, also had, as a means, complete knowledge of the construction, security plan, and lay-out of the World Trade Center towers, as contractor for the official investigation of the first WTC bombing in 1993. The investigation was performed by Tridata, a full subsidiary of SPC.

As a member of Project for a New American Century (PNAC), which advocated the invasion of Iraq, even under Clinton, and expressed a need for a "new Pearl Harbor," motive is also established for Zakheim as part of a cabal which would include Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, both also members of PNAC.

The Department of Defense and its civilian bosses were responsible for the nation's air defenses and the scheduling of war games. It is well-known that war games resembling the real-life unfolding of 9/11 confused NORAD commanders, one of whom, Major Kevin Nasypany, said that morning: “The hijack’s not supposed to be for another hour.”

Other PNAC members who were high DoD officials on 9/11 were Richard Perle, and Douglas Feith.

A former National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigator says the search for facts in the plane crash that killed Sen. Paul Wellstone includes early, unusually strong attention on the qualifications of the two pilots.

"It makes you wonder how it will be worked in when the board determines probable cause," says Chuck Leonard, a retired senior investigator who worked on more than 200 NTSB investigations, in an interview with the Minneapolis Star-Tribune.

Leonard said the negative reports from fellow pilots of Conry and Guess were "very unusual" because "most pilots will only say great things" or at least "hesitate to bash" colleagues who die in crashes.

“I asked him how his week had been. He said, ‘it’s been tough. Vice President Cheney called me in and told me to get on their bandwagon or there would be serious ramifications in Minnesota. ‘And stop sticking your nose into 9/11; there are some rumors going around, but we are going to get to the bottom of this.’ When Paul made this statement, there were about 10 military veterans standing around us, and he spoke to them about 9/11...’There are so many things going on about 9/11 that just don’t make sense...’ Wellstone knew 9/11 was staged. Wellstone was after 9/11.”

It started with a fingerprint of a 25-year-old college professor who opposed the Vietnam War and ended with a search for his remains, 32 years later, in a wooded area near Eveleth, Minn.

The FBI's files on Paul and Sheila Wellstone, many of which are being made public for the first time, shed new light on the extent of the relationship between the FBI and the political activist who would go on to become a U.S. senator from Minnesota.

(Jim Fetzer is in the vid. if you can get past that, it's a decent watch)

US Senator Paul Wellstone was killed when his reelection campaign plane crashed just before landing. The official story of the crash simply does not add up. Witnesses, first-responders and others tell the story the FBI and National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) hoped to cover-up. Murder most foul, yet the FBI ruled out foul play before the raging fire was out. The NTSB went along, blaming the crash (eight dead) on the pilots. $25 million was quickly paid out for silence. But the truth will out. "His death changed the direction of the country and possibly of the world, maybe irrevocably.” The remarkable, charismatic Paul "who meant so much to rural people, ordinary people" was in the final 10 days of his reelection campaign. Senator Paul Wellstone (D-Minn.) spoke publicly and passionately against the war in Iraq, social and economic issues, and was looking into the 9-11 attacks at the time of his death. His campaign was a primary target for defeat in this election and would help shift the balance of power in the Senate significantly. The recent polls showed Paul was going to win the election.

AMY GOODMAN: And talk about what they found in this fatal plane crash.

MADELEINE BARAN: Well, what’s interesting is that the FBI did pursue some criminal leads in the first two days. So, for example, they received a call from someone in Jacksonville, Florida, who claimed that mobsters involved with the trucking industry had disconnected the plane’s de-icers. The office received a threatening postcard the day before. Another person said that he heard gunshots in the area right before the crash. So, they investigated all of these leads. And so, it was interesting to me that they did take them seriously, and they range even from someone saying that an Aryan group might have been involved. So, yeah, and then after two days they passed it along to the National Transportation Safety Board.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And in the files on this many years of tracking him, anything especially unusual of the surveillance of him that you found?

MADELEINE BARAN: No. He gets in, you know, right at the tail end of Hoover’s tenure at the FBI, so really that 1970 entry is the only one from his activism as a young college professor. It was interesting that, you know, such a small-scale protest would make its way into the FBI’s file.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, Madeleine Baran, last fifteen seconds, what you were most surprised by and what you think is the most important headline out of these documents that you received under FOIA request?

MADELEINE BARAN: Just the risk that Wellstone took by taking the stance against the Gulf War. He’s very scared by these threats he received. And, you know, that sometimes people take on that risk if they have an unpopular view.